SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(All) 1334

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
VIKRAM D. CHAUHAN, J.
Mukesh and Others – Appellants
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent
Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/s 438 Cr.P.C. Nos. 6849, 6901, 6946, 7113 of 2024
Decided On : 08-11-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellants : Girijesh Kumar Gupta, Shiv Shankar Pd Gupta.
For the Respondent: Naveen Kumar Srivastava.

IMPORTANT POINT
Anticipatory bail is an extraordinary remedy, granted only in exceptional cases where false implication or extraordinary circumstances are demonstrated; involvement in an unlawful assembly with intent to commit serious offenses justifies denial of bail.

Headnote:

(A) Indian Penal Code - Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 323, 325, 324, 504, 506, 427 - Anticipatory bail applications - Allegations of assault and gunshot injuries during a midnight incident - The court found that the applicants were part of an unlawful assembly and had the intention to commit culpable homicide, as evidenced by the use of firearms and the nature of injuries inflicted. (Paras 3, 11, 35, 51)

(B) Anticipatory Bail - The court emphasized that anticipatory bail is an extraordinary remedy and should be granted only in exceptional cases where the accused can demonstrate false implication or exceptional circumstances. (Paras 44, 48)

Facts of the case:

The applicants sought anticipatory bail in connection with an FIR alleging a midnight assault involving firearms, resulting in grievous injuries to multiple individuals. The incident arose from a prior dispute between children.

Findings of Court:

The court determined that the applicants were part of an unlawful assembly and had the intention to commit serious offenses, thus denying the bail applications.

Issues: The main issues included the applicants' involvement in the unlawful assembly and the justification for the use of firearms.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the presence of the applicants at the scene during the assault, coupled with the nature of the injuries, indicated their participation in a planned attack.

Result: Anticipatory bail applications dismissed.

JUDGMENT :

VIKRAM D. CHAUHAN, J.

1. Heard Sri Sunil Kumar and Sri Girijesh Kumar Gupta, learned counsels for the applicants and Sri Naveen Kumar Srivastava, learned counsels for the informant, as well as, Sri Om Prakash Dwivedi, learned A.G.A. for the State.

2. All the four anticipatory bail applications are heard together with the consent of learned counsels for the respective parties and are being decided by a common judgment and order.

3. Present Anticipatory Bail Applications are preferred with the common prayer to grant anticipatory bail to applicants-Mukesh S/o Buddhu, Nitin s/o Raju, Tusar s/o Sripal, Shiva s/o Sripal, Tusar @ Tushar Tomar s/o Mukesh @ Mukesh Tomar, Amit @ Dhoni @ Amit Tomar s/o Surendra @ Surendra Singh, Vikas s/o Mukesh, Umesh s/o Deshpal, Deepak s/o Munipal, Sonu s/o Satveer, Kapil s/o Ompal, Rahul s/o Chandar @ Chandrapal Singh and Ashish @ Deepak s/o Surendra (13 in number) in Case Crime No. 0206 of 2024 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 452, 352, 307, 323, 325, 324, 504, 506, 427 I.P.C., Police Station - Pilkhua, District-Hapur.

4. It is submitted by learned counsels for applicants that FIR was lodged on 22.04.2024 at 1701 hours in respect of an incident of 21/22.04.2024 with the allegation that a dispute had arisen on 21.04.2024 between children and that was resolved, however, nominated accused persons have later on come near the house of informant and when informant along with family members reached near their house in mid night at about 1:00 PM (in the intervening night of 21.04.2024 & 22.04.2024), accused persons have assaulted the informant & family members and have fired & assaulted, as a result of same, injured have suffered injuries including firearm injury.

5. Learned counsel for applicants submits that general allegations of assault are made against nominated accused persons except against Tusar, Amit @ Dhoni, Ashish and Rahul against whom allegations of firing have been made. Learned counsels for applicants submits that 11 persons have suffered injuries in alleged occurrence out of which injury of three injured is grievous in nature. Injured, who have suffered grievous injuries are, namely, Keshav, Ankit and Shiva. Injury report of injured-Keshav is at Page-27 of compliance affidavit dated 02.09.2024, where injured has received single gun shot injury on right arm. Learned counsels for applicants submits that insofar as, injury of injured-Ankit is concerned, which is at page-30 of compliance affidavit, he has also suffered single gun shot injury at left thigh. Insofar as, injury of injured-Shiva is concerned, there are superficial abrasion on right cheek and has not suffered any gun shot injury. Learned counsels for applicants by referring to Page-60 of compliance affidavit submits that injured-Ankur has suffered grievous injuries, however, as per NCCT report, which is at Page-34 of compliance affidavit, there are no bony injury found.

6. Learned counsels for applicants further submit that two persons have suffered gun shot injuries, which is on non-vital part of the body. By referring to statement of injured, which is at page-19 of counter affidavit, learned counsels for applicants submit that general allegations with regard to assault have been made against accused persons. The injured has stated that it was a night incident and many persons were present at the place and he had only seen persons standing at the place of occurrence. Learned counsel for applicants further submits that eye-witness-Aman has also given the similar account. On the strength of the aforesaid statement, learned counsels for applicants submit that there are no allegation that applicant-Tusar had fired, his parentage is also not being disclosed in the statement of witnesses, as such it is not identifiable, as to who, is the author of gun shot injury.

7. Learned counsels for applicants further submit that applicants have no previous criminal history and a simple quarrel between two groups have resulted into present FIR and as

                            Click Here to Read the rest of this document
                            1
                            2
                            3
                            4
                            5
                            6
                            7
                            8
                            9
                            10
                            11
                            SupremeToday Portrait Ad
                            supreme today icon
                            logo-black

                            An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

                            Please visit our Training & Support
                            Center or Contact Us for assistance

                            qr

                            Scan Me!

                            India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

                            For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

                            whatsapp-icon Back to top